Member

In Part I of this series on Radio Waves, I have tried to show that Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic waves is untenable because electric fields cannot exist in vacuum where there are no electric charges to produce them and because experiments have yet to prove that electric fields can be produced in vacuum by changing magnetic fields. My aim was to show that a new theory of radio waves is needed since that based on Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic waves claiming that a radio wave travelling in vacuum consists of oscillating electric and magnetic fields mutually inducing one another is not supported by experiments, being based on assumptions and mathematical manipulations. Comments received from interested readers prompted me to offer further arguments against Maxwell's theory and this led to an extended version of the same paper titled ?Trouble with Maxwell's Electromagnetic Theory: Can Fields Induce Other Fields in Vacuum??. In this article I return to my original aim when I began this series on Radio Waves and I will try to show what I think radio waves really are and how are they produced in an antenna.

The purpose of this article is to point out that Maxwell's electromagnetic theory, believed by the majority of scientists a fundamental theory of physics, is in fact built on an unsupported assumption and on a faulty method of theoretical investigation. The result is that the whole theory cannot be considered reliable, nor its conclusions accurate descriptions of reality. In this work it is called into question whether radio waves (and light) travelling in vacuum, are indeed composed of mutually inducing electric and magnetic fields.

Recent experimental findings prompt for a new explanation of the phenomenon of polarization of light. This theory has been called by the author "wave-front fragmentation theory of polarization" and is presented in the following short communication to the readership of General Science Journal.

This is the talk delivered via internet at the 16th Annual Conference held by the Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) in May, 2009, and presented under the title "Have You Done Experiments in Fluid Mechanics Lately?". I now make it available to those interested in the aether because it contains in one document the most important ideas that together form, I think, the rudiments of a rational and consistent theory of the aether. At the top of each page are the slides shown at the conference followed below by the transcript of the verbal explanations. When the transcript was longer than the space under the slide, the slide was repeated on the next page and the transcript continued. The experiment referred to in the talk, showing the role played by the intervening medium (water) in the attractions and repulsions between two cylinders rotating in it can be viewed on YouTube as it has been recently uploaded on that site.

Formulated almost 150 years ago, Thomas Young's hypothesis that light might be a transverse wave has never been seriously questioned, much less subjected to experiment. In this article I report on an attempt to prove experimentally that Young's hypothesis is untenable. Although it has certain limitations, the experiment seems to show that sound in air, a longitudinal wave, can be polarized by reflection just like light, and this can be used as evidence against Young's hypothesis. Further refinements of the experimental setup may yield clearer results, making this report useful to those interested in the important issue of whether light is a transverse or a longitudinal wave.

The purpose of this work is to draw attention to a rather neglected field of scientific study: fluid mechanics. Although it may seem of no great importance to many investigators, on a close scrutiny it turns out to be the keystone in the understanding of the physical world. For, if you consider that light is a wave propagated by the aether, then it follows that material objects move through this fluid and are permeated by it. And it also follows that magnetic, electric, gravitational and inertial phenomena have something to do with the fluid dynamical behavior of the aether. The extent to which the aether is involved in these phenomena will be shown in the present study. A better understanding of this work requires some familiarity with the often counterintuitive effects observed in fluid media. Therefore, may I ask you: Have you done experiments in fluid mechanics lately?

This work brings to the readership of this journal another collection of some of the most significant ideas regarding the aether, which were prevailing at the dawn of the 20th century. The author, himself involved in the development of a theory of the aether, found in these quotes support, encouragement and precious thoughts for his work and hopes that they will be inspiring for others, too.

Although the theory of light seems completed and many believe that the behavior of light has been accounted for down to the most insignificant detail, there are certain experimental facts in optics for which explanations are still unsatisfactory. It may seem surprising - but nevertheless true - if we state that in fact the most basic phenomena of reflection and refraction of light are such examples of incompletely explained experimental findings, and that they are topics on which the last word has not been said yet. Further, the relation between the refractive index of a transparent medium and its chemical structure, the cause of diffraction, the mechanism of dispersion and that of double refraction, are subjects in need to be integrated into a comprehensive and unitary theory. The abandonment, during the development of the theory of light, of the aether as a necessary medium for its propagation, led to the anomalies that we encounter today, of which one example is the utterly incomprehensible notion of light as a corpuscle and as a wave at the same time, in which it is purported that one feature gives stronger effects than the other depending on the experimental set up. The initial purpose of the present work was to see on what grounds has the aether been dropped from any theory of light. After finding that the key reason for this was the hypothesis of light as a transversal oscillation of the aether, this work gained a second purpose: to show whether this hypothesis was indeed necessary for the explanation of the optical phenomena it claimed it described, i.e. those involving light modified by reflection or double refraction. We find that the hypothesis of light as a transversal oscillation of the aether is not necessary for explaining the phenomena of double refraction and those related to it and the present study shows how this proves that it is not only possible, but mandatory, to return to a picture in which light is a longitudinal, compression wave in the aether. This later representation is not new, having been long held true by most of the scientists who made significant contributions to the development of the theory of light. The return to the representation of light as a compression wave in the aether will lead to a better understanding of the optical phenomena and, most significantly, it will open the way towards an intelligible and more accurate theory of the aether itself.

It is widely known that the principles of classical mechanics as laid down by Isaac Newton have certain difficulties related especially to the physical interpretation of the notions of force and mass. Motivated by the arguments of a recent article showing that gravitation is an Archimedic force in the aether, the present work takes a fresh look at the ideas that constitute the fundaments of Newtonian mechanics. New interpretation of the crucial experiment of free fall of bodies points to the necessity of changing the views accepted today. The most significant conclusion is that classical mechanics, essentially a theory addressing the motion of solid bodies, must have its principles derived from those of fluid mechanics, more specifically from the behavior of the fluid aether.

The notion of an aether filling all the space appeared recently as the only one option towards building an intelligible theory of the physical world. A close scrutiny of what the natural philosophers of the past thought about the aether reveals an amazing and febrile quest for an accurate description of this medium. What we find by reading their works anew is not only that the existence of the aether was never questioned, but that the best researchers at the forefront of science struggled to come up with that theory of aether which would best explain the experimental evidence they had. Perplexed by the huge amount of literature dedicated to the aether, we decided to share it with the readership of this journal.

The present work criticizes the principle of equivalence as an assumption that purposely blurs the distinction between gravitation and inertia. It is shown that Einstein sets artificial limits to the means by which an observer can distinguish between the two situations he can find himself in, i.e. between a gravitational field and an accelerated platform. We argue that an observer can, if he so wishes, discern between gravitation and inertia and has any right to consider them two different manifestations of nature. Recognizing the limitations brought in by the principle of equivalence offers us the right to reject any conclusion stemming from it and, in particular, to object to the fact that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity can offer any explanation at all regarding the true cause and nature of the gravitational force.

Ampere's effect is the force that develops between two current-carrying conductors, and no theory exists that explains how this effect actually occurs in nature. The present work proposes that the charges flowing in a wire and constituting the electric current drag the aether that exists outside and permeates the inside of the wire. This leads to the conclusion that the force discovered by Ampere is simply a Bernoulli effect occurring within the fluid aether.

An object released from hand and falling to ground is such a common occurrence that it is not even perceived as a phenomenon of nature. Nonetheless, the accelerated motion of such an object has all the characteristics of a physical process and at its origin is the most ubiquitous force known in science. The universality of gravitation was demonstrated in the theories of Nicholaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton. The latter's insight of explaining the movement of celestial objects by the same force that acts near the surface of the Earth and causes the fall of bodies was an important step that greatly expanded our knowledge. Notwithstanding the huge efforts directed towards elucidating the nature of gravitation, no satisfactory results have been attained and no meaningful theory has been proposed so far. It is not quantitative evaluations or mathematical methods that are in want, but a picture that can be comprehended qualitatively in the first place. Only after such a qualitative picture has been found can it be hoped that a meaningful mathematical theory be constructed. The unerring methods of calculus would then make possible finding results whose physical interpretation would point to phenomena possible to occur, giving in the same time the conditions that are needed for them to occur. The present work endeavors to propose such a theory and shows that the gravitational force is essentially Archimedic in nature, acting on all bodies immersed in the vast ocean of aether. (this article appeared also in Galilean Electrodynamics, Volume 21, No. 3 (2010), pp. 53-58)

The consequences of the hypothesis that the charges flowing in a wire and constituting the electric current drag the aether that exists outside and permeates the inside of the wire have been examined with the methods of mathematical physics. The satisfactory confirmation of Ampere's law shows that the origin of the force of interaction between current-carrying conductors, and of the magnetic force in general, is to be ascribed to the state of motion of the aether and to the variation of the static and dynamic pressures that this motion generates. The validity of the principles of this theory is also demonstrated by calculations that reveal new terms contributing to the force between current-carrying conductors. These supplementary terms correspond to the behavior of matter in a magnetic field and are missing in the original works of Ampere. This raises questions about the extent to which Ampere's law was actually derived from experiments at the time of its enunciation. The results obtained herein find appropriate the substitution of the notion of magnetic field with that of aether field. Formulated conversely, the present theory shows how Ampere's effect can be considered a confirmation of the fact that vacuum is filled with aether in a state of static pressure, the magnetic effects arising from aether movement brought about, among others, by the movement of electric charges.

Since their discovery by Michael Faraday, magnetic lines of force have represented a powerful way to visualize magnetic fields. Nevertheless, their physical interpretation cannot be considered a settled issue even today. The voice of James Clerk Maxwell, who advocated a change in the state of the aether in regions where the lines were made manifest, has gradually been overcome by those of proponents of theories representing the lines of force as merely geometrical lines running through empty space. The accepted model is inadequate, and the present work provides a new interpretation of magnetic lines of force that restores the material aether as the seat of magnetic phenomena.